What NON-OBVIOUS stuff would you like to see in Revised?

[Kesh]

Basically, I'd like to see more of d20 Modern rolled into D&D.

1) Replace Alignment with Allegiances. It wouldn't really change any class or spell requirements (Paladins must have allegiances to Law and Good; Detect Evil still works with any Evil-allegiance creatures)

2) Revised Two-Weapon Fighting

3) Martial Arts feats

4) Action points

5) Revised spell/power descriptions

 

[Terraism]

3) Put art into the three appendicies of the Monster Manual.

Other than that horrible picture of a vampire.

 

[Sejs]

couple off the top of my head:

1) (based on a suggestion from a previous thread): get rid of the half orc, and half elf races. Add orc as a player race. Add the feats Elven Blood, and Orcish Blood as human-only, take at character creation only feats, mutually exclusive feats. Elven blood gives elfy stuff (low light vision, sleep resistance, etc), Orcish blood gives orcy stuff (darkvision, scent, uh.. poor hygene..). And for god's sake make the Orc and Orcish Blooded human characters balanced with the other races. +2 str is not the end of the world.

2) change the Barbarian class name to Berzerker. Barbarian indicates a person from a primitive culture, and isn't appropriate if you're not.. well.. a person from a primitive culture.

3) Make Toughness, Endurance, and Skill Focus not suck. Example: instead of +3hp, make toughness be +2 effective con for the purpose of determining Hp only. Make Endurance apply to everything endurancy- fatigue rolls for not sleeping (or extend how long you can go without sleep, or less the ammount of sleep you need in a night), etc. Skill focus should be +3 on one skill, or +2 on two related skills: Knowledge: Arcana and Spellcraft, Diplomacy and Sense Motive, Appraise and Profession, etc.

4) Add more feats that don't directly relate to killing, magic, or other directly tied into Adventuring things. The Education fear from the FRCS is a good example. As is Cosmopolitan.

5) Balance spells between classes better. Why can an arcane caster funnel negative energy but not postive? Why can an evil cleric make intelligent undead, but the Arch-Necromancer cannot without researching the cleric's spell? Why can't an enchanter Modify Memory but a bard can?

 

[Oni]

2) change the Barbarian class name to Berzerker. Barbarian indicates a person from a primitive culture, and isn't appropriate if you're not.. well.. a person from a primitive culture.

If they do that they should also get rid of the illiteracy disadvantage.

 

[Sejs]

Other than that horrible picture of a vampire.

oh yeah. the other suggestion:

NO art by TOM BAXA.

 

[DDK]

When you animate the skeleton of a Dragon, it should be as Bad Ass as all possible, not the same as a giant's skeleton. A dragon's bones would be tougher, the claws bigger, the teeth nastier. An Umber Holk's claws do more damage, purely due to the SIZE of them.

As has been said on many an other forum and thread, it is the magic, not the corpse, that is holding everything together and enabling the damage to be done. The strength of the bones or the claws of the corpse have nothing to do with it.

Instead, why not just make up a new spell much like in the vein of Create Greater Undead for clerics?

A much easier mechanic if you ask me.

 

[David Argall]

more points

XP-Encounter XP should be based only on the monster, not on the PC. You bring in Billy the Kid, you get $10,000 reward. That does not change whether you are a kid armed with a squirt gun or Superman. The idea low levels deserve more is just wrong. After all, they are more likely to level from the same XP anyway.
Less drastic, base XP on total party level, not average level. When we talk about 4 PC of about the same level, it makes no difference, but the more we change from that, the worse things become. I was in a large party of about 4 10th levels and 10 1st facing a CR in the low teens. Essentially we wimps sorta held their cloaks and it was all over in a couple of rounds and we were all 3rd level for about zero effort. That we deserved something for being in danger is clear enough, but a system that gives a larger reward for a more dangerous party is clearly wrong.

XP in general should have higher requirements at higher levels. While doubling at every level would make it about impossible for anyone to ever cast a 9th level spell, it at least would prevent the campaign from graduating when the party is reaching godkill levels.

Alignment - gotta keep it. We need that excuse to go around killing monsters.

Cleric-A common refrain is "We gotta have a cleric." As long as such a useful class remains one the players have to be drafted into playing, it's a class that needs strengthening, not weakening. I'm not too aware of the 3e class distribuiton, so we may have enough clerics not to need to bribe them with more goodies, but if you sit down at the table and have to persuade somebody to do the dull healing, you don't want to weaken the class.

Heavy armor should be more useful. As noted, if you have decent dex, you are almost as well off without it as with it, and this stuff was hughly successful on the battlefield.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

As has been said on many an other forum and thread, it is the magic, not the corpse, that is holding everything together and enabling the damage to be done. The strength of the bones or the claws of the corpse have nothing to do with it.

Instead, why not just make up a new spell much like in the vein of Create Greater Undead for clerics?

A much easier mechanic if you ask me.

having to come up with a new spell either way, I'd fall firmly in the template camp. If you want to keep the old boring wussy spell for crude animations that basically just form jumbles of bones that wander around and flail, thats fine. But a real undead spell would create templated versions, perhaps with a caster level requirement per HD or CR of the original creature. The increase in possibilities not just for challenges but for storytelling and roleplaying are HUGE, and greatly needed.

That said, this level of discussion of how such a thing would or should work likely belongs over on the houserules forum.

Kahuna Burger

 

[Zappo]

Re: Wishlist

3. The feat "Ambidexterity" should be true Ambidexterity, meaning you get full Strength bonus for the "off-hand" weapon. Since, you know, if you're truly Ambidextrous YOU DO NOT HAVE AN OFF-HAND.

This would make two-weapon fighting substantially more powerful than one-weapon fighting for very strong characters, enabling a low-level character to apply his Strength modifier to damage twice per round instead of the 1.5x of one-weapon fighting. It would end up with most barbarians fighting with two weapons.

 

[Xarlen]

I'd like to see a lot more done with things OTHER then adventuring. How about some political intrigue stuff? Some rules for basic interaction, in case you Don't want to just kill stuff, but your campaign is in a City, for instance.

A lot of other systems have more rules for interactions and Non-Combat stuff. Where as D&D is 'Kill stuff, take its' junk, and don't talk to anybody; unless you're just going to lie to them or use diplomacy'.